Content uploaded by Michelle Ye
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Michelle Ye on Aug 11, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Doctoral Studies Volume 11, 2016
Cite as: Bamgboje-Ayodele, A., Ye, M., Almond, H., & Sakulwichitsintu, S. (2016). Inside the minds of doctoral stu-
dents: Investigating challenges in theory and practice. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 243-267. Re-
trieved from http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3542
Editor: Erik Shefsky
Submitted: November 17, 2015: Revised: March 13, May 10, June 5, July 17, 2016; Accepted: July 31, 2016
Material published as part of this publication, either on-line or
in print, is copyrighted by the Informing Science Institute.
Permission to make digital or paper copy of part or all of these
works for personal or classroom use is granted without fee
provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit
or commercial advantage AND that copies 1) bear this notice
in full and 2) give the full citation on the first page. It is per-
missible to abstract these works so long as credit is given. To
copy in all other cases or to republish or to post on a server or
to redistribute to lists requires specific permission and payment
of a fee. Contact Publisher@InformingScience.org to request
redistribution permission.
Inside the Minds of Doctoral Students:
Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele, Michelle Ye, Helen Almond, and
Songlak Sakulwichitsintu
School of Engineering and ICT, University of Tasmania,
Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Adeola.Bamgboje@utas.edu.au; Yaqian.Ye@utas.edu.au;
Helen.Almond@utas.edu.au; Songlak.Sakulwichitsintu@utas.edu.au
Abstract
This is a report on a qualitative investigation into the challenges and solutions for Information
Systems PhD candidature in Australia by conducting a three-phase research process. Information
Systems doctoral theses approved within the past 10 years in Australia were identified in three
areas of research, using structured evidence-based search and review methods. This was followed
by two focus groups. The first focus group provided a forum where participants engaged and con-
tributed by sharing and reflecting on experiences during their candidature. The data generated
was thematically analyzed. The second focus group provided a forum to compare, contrast, and
combine findings from the first focus group and the theses review. This was then conceptually
organized into a SWOT framework for discussion. The findings imply that there is a need, not
only for an inclusive candidature research pathway now provided by most Australian universities,
but also an integrated research and personal support pathway. The investigation resulted in defin-
ing a conceptual framework of value in Australia and internationally, which acknowledges and
bridges the academic-practice gap, offering a considerable step for future PhD candidature in-
vestment.
Keywords: PhD candidature, doctoral students, research pathway, information systems, SWOT
analysis.
Introduction
Research has identified various challenges faced by PhD candidates during their candidature, es-
pecially by first year PhD candidates, overseas students, and non-traditional PhD candidates
(Busher, Lewis and Comber, 2014; Naidoo, 2015; Wright & Cochrane, 2000). As attention has
been given to identifying the most ap-
propriate research methodology for the
investigation the PhD candidate may
choose to embark upon (Haksever &
Manisali, 2000), there are other chal-
lenges PhD candidates may encounter
during their candidature. Existing litera-
ture has identified challenges such as
financial restraints, social isolation,
problematic supervisory communication,
language barriers, experienced differ-
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
244
ence of educational system, and culture (Harman, 2002; Hockey, 1994; Wright & Cochrane,
2000).
From an academic perspective, selecting an appropriate research methodology involves challeng-
es such as the potential limitations of an adopted methodological approach but also practical dif-
ficulties, which may influence the candidate in the choice and conduct of their methodology. Ex-
amples of such challenges are: PhD candidate’s personal circumstances (Pearson, Cumming, Ev-
ans, Macauley, & Ryland, 2011), access to and use of resources (Warburton & Macauley, 2014),
or supervisory efficiencies (Buttery, Richter, & Leal Filho, 2005). Perhaps, these challenges pro-
vide reasons why 40-50% of PhD candidates do not finish (Gardner, 2008), as many do not fully
comprehend the scope of doctoral studies and are not fully aware of the challenges they will face
in their programs (Loyd, Harding-DeKam, & Hamilton, 2015).
Whilst various research articles have investigated challenges experienced by PhD candidates,
many lack in-depth detail on the methodological or research limitations that emanate as a result of
those challenges. Furthermore, it is difficult to pinpoint articles written by PhD candidates, as
more commonly they tend to publish articles in conjunction with their supervisory team or col-
leagues. This makes it difficult to identify the proportion of candidate contribution, their unbiased
perception of the limitations of study, and the actual challenges experienced during the conduct of
the study. Thus, contributing to the knowledge gap of potential PhD candidates on the challenges
they might experience during their candidature. To address this concern, we investigate the chal-
lenges PhD students in Australia encounter using two perspectives: challenges as evidenced by
the candidates’ report in theses (in theory); and challenges reported by ongoing candidates (in
practice).
Based on this reasoning, the authors focus on a review of only PhD theses, which are the sole re-
sponsibility of the candidate and should include methodological and research limitations. PhD
theses refer to the dissertation involving a doctoral research project written by a candidate for
achieving their PhD degree. Higher degree research (HDR) projects refer to research that leads to
a doctoral degree award. The fact that many limitations are usually addressed in PhD theses may
assist other PhD candidates in similar situations and guide their research choices. However, the
challenges presented in PhD theses rarely include practical limitations experienced by the candi-
date; for example, cultural, political, and personal issues which, one imagines, are fundamental to
the success of a PhD candidature. Therefore, this paper investigates Information Systems (IS)
PhD candidates’ challenges from the perspective of existing literature (theses) and the experienc-
es of current PhD candidates. The research question is: “what are the real challenges that PhD
candidates experience in Australia while investigating IS related topics?”
To address this question, we investigate the challenges Australian PhD candidates in the IS disci-
pline experience during the research process. The IS discipline was chosen because of its multi-
disciplinary nature which encourages students to study from all disciplines. Consequently, stu-
dents who enroll may not have a shared understanding about the modus operandi of an IS HDR
which may lead to mismatched expectations during their candidature. Therefore, this paper re-
ports on a review of the extant Australian PhD theses completed in the past ten years on IS related
topics, focusing on the identified methodological and research limitations. Further, the findings
are compared with the challenges four PhD candidates have personally experienced via focus
group discussions. The IS related topics are in three specific areas: electronic health (eHealth),
electronic peer learning (ePeer Learning), and electronic supply chain management (eSupply
Chain Management). These areas were selected because they are aligned with the research focus
of IS PhD candidates who volunteered for this study, thus allowing a direct comparison between
the literature and their personal experiences.
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
245
Therefore, we report on a qualitative investigation into the challenges and solutions for IS PhD
candidature in Australia by reviewing relevant doctoral theses and conducting two focus group
sessions that facilitated the generation of a SWOT framework. This section is followed by the
literature review that provides the theoretical foundations for the paper. The next section presents
the method used for conducting: a review of the relevant Australian theses, the focus group dis-
cussion, and the SWOT analysis. Following this section is the findings for the theses and the
analysis of the focus group discussion. Subsequently, the discussion section integrates the find-
ings from the preceding section into a SWOT analysis framework. This section also provides the
limitations and future research before concluding the paper in the final section.
Literature Review
In advocating for improved doctoral candidature experience, a number of researchers have ex-
plored the challenges of PhD candidates from diverse perspectives. These challenges include and
are not limited to problematic supervisory relationship (Humphrey & Simpson, 2012; Sharip &
Ibrahim, 2014; Tress, Tress, & Fry, 2009), financial hardship (Sharip & Ibrahim, 2014), being in
a liminal state (being stuck) (Kiley, 2009), stress and isolation (Jairam & Kahl Jr, 2012), and time
demands (Tress et al., 2009). Added to these challenges are problems related to being an interna-
tional student such as culture shock and language problems (Harman, 2003a; Skotvoll, 2014).
Whilst most of these challenges are generic to many PhD candidates, there appears to be many
more issues that are unique to candidates in Australia due to the implicit assumption of a stereo-
typical candidate as young, full-time, with few other commitments, commencing after an honors
degree, and progressing to academia as an early career researcher after completing a doctorate
(Pearson et al., 2011). Williams and Lee (1999) argue the British/Australian model of doctoral
training tends to incorporate pedagogical practices of neglect and indifference, which is often
traumatic for doctoral students as they are perceived as independent scholars. Perhaps this is part
of the reasons for low doctoral submission and completion rates in countries where such model of
training is incorporated (Booth & Satchell, 1995; Bourke, Holbrook, Lovat, & Farley, 2004).
The multidisciplinary nature of the IS discipline has often facilitated its classification under sci-
ence doctorates (Burmeister, 2015), which may have brought about a poor representation of IS
doctorates in the literature (Hirschheim & Klein, 2012). Added to the dearth of resources for po-
tential doctoral candidates in the IS discipline to leverage upon, is the evidence of its worst com-
pletion rates in Australia (Burmeister, 2015). In an attempt to address this issue, we draw on Ki-
ley (2009), who argues for the concept of zone of proximal development as an approach through
which a guide is provided by someone who has already engaged in that learning and is prepared
to assist a fellow learner or a potential learner. This is based on the proposition by Pilbeam and
Denyer (2009) drawn from the homophily theory, that doctoral candidates who share the same
structural attributes (studying for the same doctoral qualification) are more likely to be connected
and are thus in a good position to offer relevant guidance. Therefore, we do not only consider
challenges in theory – Australian IS PhD theses – but we also draw on the personal experiences
of IS PhD candidates in Australia who have been in the zone, thus considering challenges in prac-
tice as well. The next section presents the methodology of the research.
Method
The research is based on an interpretive research philosophy. As Gibbons (1987) describes, inter-
pretive research aims to understand the intersubjective meanings embedded in social life and to
explain why people act the way they do. As the focus of this research was to investigate PhD
candidates’ reflective experience during their PhD candidature, it was important to consider the
reality and our knowledge as social products, which cannot be separated from the social actors
who construct and make sense of the reality (Doolin, 1996).
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
246
In order to discover PhD candidates’ experience in both theory and practice, this research was
designed by following the process of three qualitative phases. The first phase was a structured
evidence-based review to locate relevant Australian doctoral theses and the following phases
were two focus group forums to understand PhD candidates’ experience face to face. The design
is based on the FMA framework proposed by Checkland and Holwell (1998), which presents the
relationship of elements relevant to any piece of research as shown in Figure 1. In the FMA
framework, a theoretical framework of ideas (F) is applied through a methodology (M) to investi-
gate a problem of interest in an area of concern/application (A). In this research, the framework of
ideas (F) comprises the foundations of current literature concerning PhD candidature and the
structured review of relevant doctoral theses. The methodology (M) is a focus group approach
carried out in the interpretive paradigm. The area of concern (A) is PhD candidates’ challenges
and solutions for Information Systems PhD candidature in Australia.
Figure 1. Relationships between the relevant elements of the research
(adapted from Checkland and Holwell (1998))
Specifically, Phase 1 of reviewing theses involved the IS-related topics over the past ten years in
the areas of eHealth, ePeer Learning and eSupply Chain Management. The electronic search was
conducted in the library database Trove. The search process was limited to keywords and titles in
thesis and composed of the following related terms: “eHealth” for eHealth, “electronic peer learn-
ing” for ePeer Learning, and “electronic supply chain management” for eSupply Chain Manage-
ment. The theses were limited to those that: (a) focused on IS-related topics; (b) involved research
in eHealth, ePeer Learning or eSupply Chain Management; (c) were approved between 2005 and
2015; (d) were in English language; (e) were Australian theses; and (f) where full-text was avail-
able online. In Phases 2 and 3, each of the two focus group forums lasted 90 minutes, which was
designed to utilize communication between research participants, to understand participants’
views and experiences of the topic, and to elicit conflicting and shared views in order to generate
data (Kitzinger, 1995). The first focus group discussion (Phase 2) was carried out to generate the
themes and the second focus group discussion (Phase 3) was conducted to allocate the themes
into a SWOT analysis framework as shown in Figure 2.
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
247
Figure 2. The two focus group discussions
The focus group participants included four current final year PhD candidates in the IS discipline
in an Australian university. According to Hensen (2006), Kitzinger (1995), and Rice and Ezzy
(1999), four participants are sufficient for a focus group. The participants were recruited during
mandatory PhD candidate information sessions held in the university where they volunteered to
participate in the focus groups. Due to the context of the investigation and the ethical require-
ments, the participants were anonymized and labeled as P1-P4 (see Table 1). All materials col-
lected from the focus groups were treated with confidentiality. The research was based on an in-
terpretive paradigm and assessed for rigor using the criteria; credibility, transferability, dependa-
bility and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Among the criteria, the relevant interpretive
criterion corresponding to generalizability is transferability. Therefore, our findings do not seek to
be generalizable as the research focuses only on exploring a particular phenomenon thoroughly.
The findings of the research are, however, expected to be transferable as there are similar patterns
of behaviors that can be learned.
Table 1. Focus group participants
Participant
Gender
Age
group
Research
area of the
PhD can-
didate
Has
scholar-
ship?
Number of
supervisors
Supervi-
sors all
from one
school?
P1
Female
45-55
eHealth
No
2
No
P2
Female
45-55
eLearning
Yes
3
No
P3
Female
25-35
eLearning
No
2
No
P4
Female
25-35
eSupply
Chain
Manage-
ment
Yes
2
Yes
The first focus group prompted collaboration among the PhD candidates. The focus group method
allowed the researchers to explore a range of ideas and feelings about issues and highlight the
differences in perspective between individuals (Rabiee, 2004). As a useful qualitative research
tool, the focus group provided an opportunity for the PhD candidates to talk reflectively about
both the positive and negative experiences during their PhD candidature, and to voice concerns
and expectations (Diambra, McClam, Fuss, Burton, & Fudge, 2009). The focus group discussion
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
248
was audio recorded and later transcribed. Data analysis took a bottom-up thematic approach
(Maxwell, 1996). The analytical technique, three-phase coding (Creswell, 1998), namely open
coding, axial coding, and selective coding, was applied for revealing major themes with extrac-
tions of quotations. Three themes emerged – administration, research and personal – with a total
of 41 axial codes.
After the group agreed on the sub-themes and themes generated from the first focus group, a sec-
ond focus group was convened. The findings from the theses review were combined with the
thematic analysis into a SWOT analysis by the research participants. It was important to include
the research participants, especially during the process of allocating the sub-themes into the
SWOT categories, as it helped to generate insights that portray the participants’ reflection on their
HDR candidature.
SWOT analysis was adopted because it has been commonly recognized as a useful tool for strate-
gic planning and decision making (Helms & Nixon, 2010), specifically in education studies (Dy-
son, 2004; Hai & Tsou, 2009; Kuiper & Thomas, 2000; Lee, Lo, Leung, & Ko, 2000; Maiteny &
Ison, 2000). The focus group discussion allowed us to formulate successful strategies or recom-
mendations, after reviewing the strengths and weaknesses for success or risk factors identified by
the PhD candidates, in the light of the threats and opportunities those factors present. In the first
instance, the sub-themes were allocated into either the category of Weakness or Threat. After fur-
ther discussion, the group found each sub-theme could easily be repositioned as a Strength or Op-
portunity. The following sections will detail, present, and discuss the findings from the theses
review and the focus group themes.
Findings
The findings are presented from the perspective of the theses review and the two reflective focus
group discussions. As discussed in the method section, this is based on the qualitative three phase
research process that was conducted. Phase 1 involves the theses review while Phases 2 and 3
involve the initial and the final reflective focus group discussions.
Findings from the Theses Review
The initial search produced a total of 105 relevant theses. Out of these 105 theses, 27 met the in-
clusion criteria, including 6 eHealth, 12 ePeer Learning, and 9 eSupply Chain Management. The
Appendix presents a summary of the findings of the theses review, focusing on limitations ad-
dressed in the thesis. A search of limitations was conducted by initially looking for a section for
limitations within the table of content. If no limitation section was immediately available, the au-
thors read the methodology and conclusion chapters to identify any discussion of limitations and
finally searched for the keyword ‘limit*’ throughout the thesis.
The Appendix – the results of the theses review – illustrates the common limitations addressed in
the theses, which include:
• resource limitations regarding time frame and funding (e.g. survey length and sample
size) which limited the scope of what the researcher could explore; and
• limitations on access to sensitive data.
It was interesting to note that, across the theses reviewed, many discussed the limitations of their
study from a positive angle, thereby not portraying a true picture of the limitations. Some failed to
discuss any limitation of the research; others did not provide any explanation to justify their limi-
tations. For example, Huq (2007) and Watters (2011) stated that the use of a single case study
was the limitation of their methodology. Though, using a single case study in itself is not neces-
sarily a limitation, as it depends on the context and philosophical paradigm of the research. The
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
249
fact that the limitations in the theses (in theory) are not necessarily realistic highlights the need to
investigate the actual challenges of Australian IS PhD candidature so as to discover the real pic-
ture of the difficulties that may plague a PhD (in practice).
Findings from Focus Group Discussions
Due to ethical requirements and the context of the investigation, the participants and specific lo-
cations have been redacted. It can, however, be revealed that the participants were all in the final
year of their PhD candidature, within an IS discipline, in a university in Australia. Analysis of the
data produced 18 sub-themes and 3 themes. The themes are: administration, research, and per-
sonal. Based on these themes, the result from the focus group discussion is structured in three
sections, one for each theme.
Administration
The theme administration refers to the challenges the PhD candidates experienced in relation to
the perceived responsibility of the university and university-related resources. This encompasses
issues around availability, finance, information, office location, politics, and responsibility. The
sub-themes and the associated axial codes are shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Theme 1 - administration
Availability involves the level of access which the candidates have to their supervisors when
considering the teaching, research, administrative roles as well as the personal challenges that
supervisors may experience at any time during the supervisee’s candidature. This becomes prob-
lematic if the supervisor’s skillset is indispensable within that supervisory arrangement. Hence,
the candidate has to wait till the supervisor becomes available, thus wasting time in some situa-
tions. For instance;
The research paper was delayed for 6 months because my supervisor was too busy with
other things. Therefore, the paper was becoming old even before it was sent out for re-
view ... (P4)
Finance is concerned with the budget constraints and monetary resources that are provided by the
university and allocated to students for conducting the research investigation associated with PhD
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
250
candidature. The problem here relates to the fact that the expectation at the beginning of and/or
before the candidature is not usually met during the course of the candidature.
In preparation for my confirmation of candidature, I remember I was told that a certain
sum of money was allocated to every candidate to conduct research. Based on that under-
standing I prepared my research proposal, which includes the budget. And by the way, I
believe the research proposal was approved because I passed the confirmation. However,
when I needed some of the money for my research activities, I was told the school had no
money. (P4)
Information involves the level at which the university communicates with the PhD candidates
during the course of their candidature. The lack of information between the university and the
student can indeed become detrimental, as the candidate will not know what they do not know.
In the first year of my PhD, I was not informed in any way, by anyone, that I needed to
complete some compulsory introductory units. One month prior to the confirmation of
candidature, I received a checklist from the Research Coordinator and that was when I
got to know I needed to finish those units before the end of my first year. A consequence
of that was my confirmation was delayed for one year. (P3)
Office location refers to the physical situation the candidate finds himself/herself within the uni-
versity environment, which constitutes a daily workspace for the student. The problem that en-
sued here concerns the fact that one of the participants was given an individual office space to
work in but this led to loneliness, lack of information and isolation, which was detrimental to the
survival of the student.
Hmmm ... in the early days of my PhD, due to the limitation of space in the building
where my school is located, my office was located in a different school, a different build-
ing. I felt quite isolated at that time when I had the office by myself. That was part of the
reasons why I missed some important information about the course of my candidature.
(P3)
Politics is concerned with management related issues such as power relations, hierarchy, conflict
and issues between and within disciplines. Firstly, the problems within disciplines can be por-
trayed as an implicit conflict between the technical (programming and system development-
related) and non-technical (people and social aspects of the use and application of information
technology (IT)) academics. This occurred in school seminars where candidates with non-
technical research topics are blatantly shut down by technical academics because the topic was
not technical.
Hmmm ...what I recall is, when I newly started with my research with a theoretical topic,
I got questioned and actually criticized in a school seminar by a technically oriented aca-
demic member. Although I explained how this theoretical topic relates to IT and how my
research could be an important part of the IT domain, the topic was still criticized by that
person only because it did not involve programming or system development. I felt it was
criticism for the sake of criticism. (P3)
Responsibility refers to the perceived obligation of each of the stakeholders within the university
environment of the candidate. This becomes an issue when responsibilities are not clearly laid out
from the university level down to the level of the candidates involved. The scenario in the excerpt
below relates to a one-year delay for one of the participant’s confirmation of candidature due to
lack of information.
Oh well ... I think it was mostly my responsibility for that mistake because I should have
looked up all the information on the website, which I did not do. It was partially my su-
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
251
pervisor’s responsibility but he thought I already knew about [compulsory units] there-
fore, he did not mention it. I will say it was also the School’s and the [Research Divi-
sion’s] responsibility. Putting up a single webpage on the website is not a sufficient level
of support for information sharing. (P3)
Research
The theme research refers to the complexities and choices related to the conduct of investigations
throughout the course of the candidature. This consists of the following sub-themes: choice, data,
nature of research, participants, research conduct, and risks. The sub-themes and the associated
axial codes are shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Theme 2 - research
Choice is concerned with issues concerning the choice of the research topic and the impact of
industry trends. Some of the participants highlighted the fact that they did not have the choice to
choose the research topic they wanted which may have resulted in loss of motivation to complete
the study. However, one of the participants stated that the choice of the topic given by the
supervisor was based on the industry trend and grant opportunities that became available in the
research space.
Well ... when I think about it now, I was basically tailored towards a substantive area,
which I knew nothing about. I remember my supervisor told me about the grant received
in that research area but I didn’t mind the topic at that time because I felt my research
would at least be relevant to the industry and of course funded. Now that I reflect on the
journey so far, I wonder what would have happened to me if I didn’t find the topic inter-
esting. (P4)
Data involves the decisions made regarding the data collection methods required for the conduct
of the research investigation. One issue mentioned here concerns the use of surveys. As the length
of surveys has to be limited, the questions posed in surveys have to be limited as well, in order to
elicit good responses from respondents. However, this decision is often made at the detriment of
the robustness of the research itself, as evidenced by one of the participants.
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
252
... I told you I had to shorten my survey because of the respondents and because of the
money to be spent on panels. So, my supervisor said I should put the comprehensive sur-
vey in the appendix to let my examiner know that I did the work. (P4)
Another interesting issue relates to the use of emails, which is a low cost data collection method
but does not assure participants of the confidentiality of their responses.
After my first round of interviews, I sent each participant a follow-up email, asking for
specific stories according to the aspects I am investigating. These stories were quite polit-
ical and often involved the attitude towards their superiors. Out of 14 emails, I only got 2
people responding and willing to have a second interview. One participant replied and
said she was not comfortable answering those sensitive questions especially in the written
form. However, the 2 follow-up interviews turned out to be most interesting and valuable.
So I think, although it was disappointing that I got a low response with the follow-up
emails, it was quite worth doing. (P3)
Nature of research refers to issues related to the sensitivity of the research investigation, which
tends to influence the decisions made about the conduct of the research. More specifically, this
deals with the context of the research investigation and the actual research questions. One of the
issues raised here refers to how the context of the research investigation can indeed limit the
interest of potential research participants.
... on that occasion, I rang many firms to see if I could interview them about the problem
that occurred with their products, but nobody wanted to talk to me about the areas where
they failed in their operational processes. It doesn’t portray them well, as you can imag-
ine ... (P4)
Participant is concerned with matters related to access to, the cohort of, the time of and the level
of cooperation of the participants. One of the most interesting issues discussed here concerns the
difficulty one of our participants experienced when trying to contact respondents.
... you know my research participants are students in a university. So, I was unable to dis-
tribute an online survey directly to online participants because of the ethical require-
ments. So it was difficult for me to encourage the students to voluntarily participate in the
study which led to a very low response rate. (P2)
Research conduct involves issues related to the roles, methodology, implementation,
generalizability, research bias, implementation and evaluation concerning a research
investigation. One of the issues here relates to the assumptions that are made by the university
when accepting a PhD candidate, in terms of the expectation of information systems literacy.
Well … I would say for example; subject area sensitivity and as a researcher or profes-
sional the access level to the information I required. eLiteracy and access to online ser-
vices is also a concern for, not only research participants but the presumption that the
candidate is eLiterate and has access and appropriate funding to support services beyond
the university confines to progress their research all of which may influence the generali-
zability and validity of the research don’t you think? (P1)
Risk is concerned with the ethical and legal considerations that are related to the conduct of a
research investigation. It was revealed that ethical considerations could indeed influence cross-
cultural studies. The context of the investigation may require the researchers to acquire ethical
approval from the countries involved, which influences the time spent on the research. This is
problematic for PhD candidates as the time allotted for their research investigation is quite
limited.
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
253
I could not conduct the study in [my university in my country] because I had to do 2 eth-
ics applications and the one in [my university in my country] had many processes and
levels of approval which it had to go through before I now apply for the one in Australia.
So, due to my research timeline, I had to modify my research to focus on Australia alone
because of the shorter ethics approval process. (P2)
Personal
The theme personal involves issues related to the PhD candidates’ lives throughout the course of
their candidature. This consists of the following sub-themes: culture, geography, isolation,
uniqueness, and work-life balance as shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Theme 3 - personal
Culture is concerned with the extent to which diversity is accommodated within a university en-
vironment. Whilst the participants acknowledged the full acceptance and understanding of candi-
dates that hail from all communities within Australia, they however had issues as international
candidates. One of the issues relates to culture shock and the difficulty in understanding the stern
style of communication of some of the supervisors.
... my first 6 months in Australia and in this [university] was stressful because I just did
not understand the communication style of my supervisor. I took all the comments emo-
tionally because nobody had ever talked to me like that before so it was hard for me to
take those comments objectively. But when I understood that supervisor about 1 year lat-
er, then I started considering [the supervisor] as a blessing, rather than a curse. (P4)
Geography concerns the considerations related to the location of the university with reference to
the location of one’s immediate family members who are close enough to influence the candi-
date’s studies. The excerpt below shows how one of the participants failed to critically consider
the impact of the geographical location of the university where the study would be undertaken.
... because I got a scholarship here I didn’t have a choice. And you know how difficult it
is to get a job in a remote area, so my partner has to stay on the mainland where he got a
job.... If I have to choose between going for a conference and going to see my partner, I
will certainly choose my partner ... It’s quite difficult for me. (P4)
Isolation involves the problems that may arise due to the loneliness of the journey towards a doc-
torate degree, which has the tendency to lead to lack of vital information. This may however be
reduced through communication and networking, which is sometimes facilitated by the activities
provided by the university or even the provision of a shared office space for PhD candidates with-
in a discipline.
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
254
... if I was in a shared space with other colleagues, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have missed
the information about the compulsory units in the first year of my candidature. (P3)
Uniqueness refers to the level of IT literacy, which is usually expected of any PhD candidate in a
university environment regardless of the background the candidate possesses.
… yes we are all unique and as such our individual journey to complete our PhD is
unique, as it should be. But I think in the beginning, we have mentioned the isolation of
offices and separation from family etc., there was also the fear of inadequate information
and typing skills and ability. I don’t think to this date anyone has provided a solution to
this question … I still worry about it, maybe I will reflect on it in my thesis. (P1)
Work-life balance is concerned with the extent to which a PhD candidate invests time into the
study at the expense of living a good quality lifestyle (in whichever way good quality is defined
by individual candidates).
… to me work life balance is incredibly important and difficult, I have a very supportive
husband and his cooking skills have improved a lot. Since commencing my candidature I
have had a new grandchild in [location], I have only visited [location] twice [in 3 years]
and my Mother has died in [location]…. I would love to be able to “step off” my candida-
ture, and I know I can, but personally I have made a commitment to myself to see this
through … I think I could do better with this work-life balance thing … (P1)
In summary, this sub-section has presented the results of the findings from the focus group dis-
cussion. The analysis of the data has produced 18 sub-themes and 3 themes. The themes present-
ed here are: administration, research and personal. The findings presented in this section will be
discussed and interpreted in the next section.
Discussion
This section does not only discuss the findings but also compares the challenges in theory with
those identified in practice. In line with existing literature, our findings reveal that, for HDR stu-
dents to confidently complete their PhD candidature, they require holistic support not only for
academic challenges but also for practical limitations (Buttery et al., 2005; Haksever & Manisali,
2000; Son & Park, 2014; Warburton & Macauley, 2014; Wright & Cochrane, 2000). The univer-
sity, faculty, school, supervisors or self may provide this. Through a dual-perspective, we report
on the HDR student limitations found in the literature (i.e. the review of doctoral theses) and dis-
cuss the identified practical challenges (i.e. the preliminary focus group) based on a final reflec-
tive HDR student focus group. Thus, we have offered the opportunity for reflection and compari-
son to real HDR student experiences. Having considered the literature, which provides insights
into the challenges of PhD candidates in theory, we take the reader one step further, by providing
rich insights as to how these challenges unfold in practice.
Based on the data and summary comparisons presented, it is evident that there are numerous simi-
larities in the literature reviewed and the focus group findings. An example is a similarity be-
tween resource limitations (theses review findings) and limited access to sensitive data (focus
group findings). However, the similarities are only obvious in two of the themes (administration
and research) that are generated from the focus group, thus validating the argument (see introduc-
tion section) that PhD theses rarely include practical limitations experienced by the candidates.
To provide a broad perspective on the findings, we no longer make any reference to eHealth,
eSupply Chain Management or ePeer Learning as sub-disciplines of the IS discipline. Instead, we
choose to focus on building a conceptual framework for higher degree researchers providing the
opportunity for aspiring and new PhD candidates to learn from real peer practical experience, as
this is the aim of this paper.
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
255
The findings from the literature present an arguably transferable set of academic limitations,
which may guide future researchers. However, the focus group deflects from a purely academic
discussion, reflecting and discussing personal and administrative obstacles, which may be inter-
preted as real limitations. The discussion integrates the results for the literature review and the
three themes that emerged from the focus group analysis into a SWOT analysis framework,
which provides recommendations for future practice. The SWOT analysis findings during our
second focus group discussion provided an opportunity for reflection. Those challenges that were
first identified as a Threat or Weakness by the PhD candidates were resolved to become an Op-
portunity or Strength as shown in Figure 6. As a result, this discussion is structured in three sec-
tions, the focus group themes: administration, research, and personal.
Figure 6. The SWOT analysis conducted during the second focus group discussion
Administration
Analysis of limitations of the theses reviewed provides some evidence of administrative concern,
categorized as resource limitations; this is seen throughout the 28 theses reviewed. However,
when the PhD candidates were offered the opportunity, in this case via a focus group, to voice
and have their concerns reflected formally via a research paper, the sub-themes of availability,
finance, information, office location, politics, and responsibility clearly emerged. The sub-themes
are not improbable from the existing literature as Harman (2003b) argues that, despite the efforts
of Australian universities to enhance academic support, administrative support, and infrastructure,
it is not clear if academic departments have adjusted to the increased numbers and diversity of
PhD candidates enrolled.
Research
The theses review presents the expected limitation results in terms of access to data (Jones, 2011)
and the nature of the methodological approach (Huq, 2007; Watters, 2011). These may all be con-
sidered as, part of or, obstacles to be aware of during the HDR student candidature. Reviewing
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
256
the comments provided by the focus group provides an alternative lens. The qualitative aspect of
the focus group allowed for the inclusion of explanation and expansion of verbalized limitation
terms. The focus group sub-themes (choice of data, nature of research, participants, research con-
duct, and risks) could all be aligned to the generic terms identified in the literature review. How-
ever, it was interesting to note that challenges related to acquiring the skill and level of sophisti-
cation required to conduct a thorough and critical literature review have not been identified in our
findings, whereas Boote and Beile (2005) argue a dissertation should not just consist of mere
summaries of the existing literature, commonly found in theses. Perhaps this is because PhD can-
didates may not be equipped with the skills to assess the quality of their work objectively. This
suggests that research-related limitations should not only be viewed by the HDR student but also
by seasoned examiners and experienced supervisors. The findings in this paper only come from
research-related challenges from the HDR student perspective.
Personal
Analysis of limitations of the theses reviewed made no reference to the personal impact on and
responsibility of an HDR student. Although, when reviewing the theses, it was commonly found
that the impact and responsibility of completing an HDR project can be clearly garnered from the
acknowledgment section of each thesis. The focus group provided for in-depth discussions that
produced the sub-themes of culture, geography, isolation, uniqueness, and work-life balance. Alt-
hough the impact of the themes of research and administration may be addressed with insight,
change in the delivery of human resources, increased skill, and greater provision of resources.
The theme of personal may take greater consideration and change in attitudes, which acknowl-
edges and understands diversity, not only from a policy stance but also from the real personal
perspective. Owler (2010) and Pearson et al. (2011) discuss this, arguing that PhD candidates
bring varying goals, expectations, history, and responsibilities to their candidature which influ-
ences the student’s experience.
Drawing upon the findings of Lahenius (2012), we provided a forum for peer self-supervision and
it was interesting to see skills from within the group emerge. This enabled those obstacles, which,
in the first instance, were presented as a Weakness or Threat to ultimately become a Strength or
Opportunity. As a group, the perceived limitations of the real PhD candidature were proved to be
a pathway to developing an awareness of what is required of a real PhD candidature. The candi-
dature not only consists of learning to become a competent researcher within an academic forum
but must equip the candidate with real confidence to deliver transferable academic and human
resource skills throughout their career (Platow, 2012). The literature reviewed and the focus
groups both demonstrated limitations to research opportunity that can be overcome with the in-
clusion of increased awareness regarding the need for a high-level communication and diversity
skills (Pearson et al., 2011).
The findings demonstrate there is a need not only for an inclusive candidature research pathway,
now provided by most universities in Australia, but an integrated research and personal support
pathway. The findings in theory confirmed the common limitations that PhD candidates have al-
ready known and many researchers experience. However, the challenges, often not mentioned in
academic papers or PhD theses, are those things we sought to discover. Reviewing the literature
and providing a forum for peer in-depth discussion has offered the opportunity for the authors to
develop a conceptual framework shown in Figure 7, which acknowledges and bridges the aca-
demic-practice gap offering a considerable step for future PhD candidature investment.
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
257
Figure 7. Conceptual framework – understanding a real PhD candidature
Therefore, the authors argue that a PhD candidate is embedded within the three themes (admin-
istration, research and personal) and has the ability to recognize the strengths and opportunities in
each of the potential challenges as a pre-requisite for successful candidature. The participants in
this study latterly understood that the PhD experience relies on the candidate’s epistemological
views about their candidature, suggesting that it is advisable to be proactive and to be optimistic.
This framework provides conceptual guidance based on the SWOT analysis for early researchers
as the aim was not to provide prescriptive solutions. It is anticipated that this guidance may be
helpful to the readers in understanding, interpreting and transferring the knowledge to their own
situation.
Limitations
In the preparation of this paper, the authors identified potential limitations and potential discus-
sion regarding bias; we argue the limitations only provide an opportunity for further research. For
instance, future research could engage cohorts at an international level, compare and contrast dif-
ferent gender or cultural views, and/or compare different disciplines and administrations. We fur-
ther acknowledge the study focuses on doctoral studies in Australia in only three information sys-
tems areas: eHealth, ePeer Learning and eSupply Chain Management. To compare the challenges
in theory with practice, our findings from the review were drawn only from HDR theses. We be-
lieve it is the sole responsibility of the candidate to provide a true reflection of the challenges in
their PhD candidature. Only theses available on Trove, accessible by the university library, were
obtained.
The focus group was conducted with four female voluntary participants. This may be regarded as
a limitation; however, Kitzinger (1995), Rice and Ezzy (1999) and Hansen (2006) argue four par-
ticipants are sufficient for a focus group, whilst Ferreira (2003) and Seagram, Gould, and Pyke
(1998) argue female PhD candidates have a higher attrition rate, which makes the contribution of
this paper valuable. In addition, we recognize future study design may benefit by following other
population models; for example, the use of a mixed methodological approach, and adding a quan-
titative demographic component that includes a survey of HDR scholars supplemented by views
and interpretations of some of the cases. Having diverse cultures and nations attempt to reproduce
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
258
this research will also be beneficial. Understanding variances in administration and institutional
policy may be considered as well.
We regard this investigation as touching upon what we identified as a huge gap between theory
and practice. Whatever the methodological approach or cohort applied, future questions to be
asked are: “why does this gap exist?” and “why do researchers fail to mention the other challeng-
es in their theses?”
Conclusion
The authors have presented results from an investigation providing substantial insights for IS PhD
candidates, supervisors and Australian universities. The defined conceptual framework may offer
a bridge between the academic and practice gap that offers a considerable step for future PhD
candidature investment. The implication of the investigation should not only be interpreted within
the discipline of Information Systems. The knowledge may be transferred, as it provides a broad
overview of what should be expected during an HDR candidature, thus giving an opportunity to
aspiring and current PhD candidates to prepare adequately early in their career.
The preparation for PhD candidature can be categorized. In terms of the research, potential candi-
dates should be empowered with insights into the need to be proactive academically and adminis-
tratively. This ensures swift progress toward their proposed study. In terms of psychological read-
iness, potential candidates, the supervisors, administrative staff, and other PhD candidates need a
better understanding of the importance of cordial relationships, cooperation, and consideration.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank the research participants for their time and support. We also thank Nadish Ka-
riyawasam for his valuable support during the conduct of the research. Finally, we appreciate the
valuable comments provided by our reviewers.
References
Ahmad, M. A. B. (2013). Mining health data for breast cancer diagnosis using machine learning.
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Canberra.) Retrieved from
http://www.canberra.edu.au/researchrepository/file/40435640-1317-4896-8df9-
57251b003466/1/full_text.pdf
Arunthari, S. (2005). Information technology adoption by companies in Thailand: A study of enterprise
resource planning system usage. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wollongong.) Retrieved from
http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/338/
Bidar, F. (2011). The impact of electronically-enabled supply chains on channel relationships and firm
performance. (Doctoral dissertation, Swinburne University of Technology). Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/1959.3/206543
Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature
review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3-15. doi:0.3102/0013189x034006003
Booth, A. L., & Satchell, S. E. (1995). The hazards of doing a PhD: An analysis of completion and
withdrawal rates of British PhD students in the 1980s. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A
(Statistics in Society), 158(2), 297-318. doi:10.2307/2983293
Bourke, S., Holbrook, A., Lovat, T., & Farley, P. (2004, November). Attrition, completion and completion
times of PhD candidates. Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education
Conference. Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/32192
Burmeister, O. K. (2015). Improving professional IT doctorate completion rates. Australasian Journal of
Information Systems, 19. doi:10.3127/ajis.v19i0.1073
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
259
Busher, H., Lewis, G., & Comber, C. (2014). Living and learning as an international postgraduate student
at a Midlands university. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40(1), 48-64.
doi:10.1080/0309877x.2013.869567
Buttery, E. A., Richter, E. M., & Leal Filho, W. (2005). An overview of the elements that influence
efficiency in postgraduate supervisory practice arrangements. International Journal of Educational
Management, 19(1), 7-26. doi:10.1108/09513540510574920
Calway, B. A. (2005). Rethinking a learning environment strategy. (Doctoral dissertation, Deakin
University.) Retrieved from http://dro.deakin.edu.au/view/DU:30023277
Checkland, P., & Holwell, S. (1998). Action research: Its nature and validity. Systemic Practice and Action
Research, 11(1), 9-21. doi:10.1023/A:1022908820784
Chen, L. (2014). Achieving Trust-oriented Data Protection in the Cloud Environment. (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Technology, Sydney.) Retrieved from
https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/29219
Coelho, J. F. G. M. (2006). Sustainability performance evaluation management systems model for
individual organizations and supply chains. (Doctoral dissertation, Central Queensland University.)
Retrieved from http://hdl.cqu.edu.au/10018/18320
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dawson, P. J. (2010). Examining how an online mentoring model may support new supplemental
instruction leaders. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wollongong.) Retrieved from
http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/3208
Dawson, S. P. (2007). Juxtaposing community with learning: The relationship between learner
contributions and sense of community in online environments. (Doctoral dissertation, Queensland
University of Technology.) Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/files/310/10885047.pdf
Diambra, J. F., McClam, T., Fuss, A., Burton, B., & Fudge, D. L. (2009). Using a focus group to analyze
students' perceptions of a service-learning project. College Student Journal, 43(1), 114. Retrieved from
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ872220
Doolin, B. (1996). Alternative views of case research in information systems. Australasian Journal of
Information Systems, 3(2). doi:10.3127/ajis.v3i2.383
Dyson, R. G. (2004). Strategic development and SWOT analysis at the University of Warwick. European
Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 631-640. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00062-6
Endicott, M. A. (2011). Peer-mediated teacher change and professional learning in networks: Specialist
languages teachers' experience of networking and the production of social capital in a context of
curriculum change. (Doctoral dissertation, Griffith University.) Retrieved from
https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/file/089fc877-35e3-9110-a7f0-
39e0dfdb3c96/1/Endicott_2011_02Thesis.pdf
Ferreira, M. (2003). Gender issues related to graduate student attrition in two science departments.
International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), 969-989. doi:10.1080/09500690305026
Gardner, S. K. (2008). Fitting the mold of graduate school: A qualitative study of socialization in doctoral
education. Innovative Higher Education, 33(2), 125-138. doi:10.1007/s10755-008-9068-x
Gerbic, P. (2006). On-campus students' learning in asynchronous environments. (Doctoral dissertation,
Deakin University). Retrieved from http://dro.deakin.edu.au/view/DU:30023288
Gibbons, M. T. (1987). Introduction: The politics of interpretation. In M. T. Gibbons (Ed.), Interpreting
politics (pp. 1-31). New York: New York University Press.
Hai, H.-L., & Tsou, M.-C. (2009). Strategic development for the department of information management of
Shih Chien University Kaohsiung campus in Taiwan by a quantifiable SWOT analysis. Journal of
Information and Optimization Sciences, 30(1), 87-107. doi:10.1080/02522667.2009.10699867
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
260
Haksever, A. M., & Manisali, E. (2000). Assessing supervision requirements of PhD students: The case of
construction management and engineering in the UK. European Journal of Engineering Education,
25(1), 19-32. doi:10.1080/030437900308616
Hansen, E. C. (2006). Successful qualitative health research: A practical introduction. Crows Nest,
Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Harman, G. (2002). Producing PhD graduates in Australia for the knowledge economy. Higher Education
Research and Development, 21(2), 179-190. doi:10.1080/07294360220144097
Harman, G. (2003a). International PhD students in Australian universities: Financial support, course
experience and career plans. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(3), 339-351.
doi:10.1016/S0738-0593(02)00054-8
Harman, G. (2003b). PhD student satisfaction with course experience and supervision in two Australian
research-intensive universities. Prometheus, 21(3), 312-333. doi:10.1080/0810902032000113460
Helms, M. M., & Nixon, J. (2010). Exploring SWOT analysis - where are we now? A review of academic
research from the last decade. Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(3), 215-251.
doi:10.1108/17554251011064837
Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (2012). A glorious and not-so-short history of the information systems
field. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(4), 188. doi:10.1.1.359.5320
Hockey, J. (1994). New territory: Problems of adjusting to the first year of a social science PhD. Studies in
Higher Education, 19(2), 177-190. doi:10.1080/03075079412331382027
Huang, S.-C. (2013). Learning English as a foreign language in a blended mode of face-to-face and online
discussions: A case study in a university in Taiwan. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney.)
Retrieved from https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/9801/1/huang_sc_thesis_final-11-11-
13.pdf
Huang, T.-T. (2010). Managing electronic product development and supplier integration activities in
Taiwan: The moderating role of knowledge sharing. (Doctoral dissertation, Griffith University).
Retrieved from https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/file/abb3f24a-28a3-fcd4-e55d-
1ad276dc7366/1/HuangT_2010_02Thesis.pdf
Humphrey, R., & Simpson, B. (2012). Negotiating a ‘Scary Gap’: Doctoral candidates,‘writing
up’qualitative data and the contemporary supervisory relationship. Journal of Education and Training
Studies, 1(1), 1-10. doi:10.11114/jets.v1i1.10
Huq, G. B. (2007). Automated negotiation in multi-agent based e-business. )Doctoral dissertation,
University of Western Sydney.) Retrieved from
http://uwsprod.uws.dgicloud.com/islandora/object/uws%3A117/datastream/PDF/download/citation.pdf
Jairam, D., & Kahl Jr, D. H. (2012). Navigating the doctoral experience: The role of social support in
successful degree completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 311-329. Retrieved from
http://informingscience.com/ijds/Volume7/IJDSv7p311-329Jairam0369.pdf
Jones, S. (2011). Knowledge barriers in IS implementation: A case study of eHealth innovation in
Australia. (Doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales.) Retrieved from
http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/50414
Khoo, L. M. S. (2012). Using an eportfolio to enhance graduate attributes among engineering students in
Malaysia. (Doctoral dissertation, Murdoch University.) Retrieved from
http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/12078
Kiley, M. (2009). Identifying threshold concepts and proposing strategies to support doctoral candidates.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 293-304.
doi:10.1080/14703290903069001
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311(7000),
299-302. doi:10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
261
Kuiper, S., & Thomas, M. W. (2000). A strategic consultancy model for establishing a center for business
communication. Business Communication Quarterly, 63(2), 52-67. doi:10.1177/108056990006300204
Lahenius, K. (2012). Communities of practice supporting doctoral studies. The International Journal of
Management Education, 10(1), 29-38. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2012.02.003
Lander, J. (2013). Negotiating community and knowledge in asynchronous online discussions in higher
education. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Technology, Sydney.) Retrieved from
https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/21828
Lee, S., Lo, K., Leung, R. F., & Ko, A. S. O. (2000). Strategy formulation framework for vocational
education: Integrating SWOT analysis, balanced scorecard, QFD methodology and MBNQA education
criteria. Managerial Auditing Journal, 15(8), 407-423. doi:10.1108/02686900010353999
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Loyd, S., Harding-DeKam, J., & Hamilton, B. (2015). Hazards to the doctoral journey: Guidance for new
doctoral students. Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 4(1). Retrieved from
http://scholarlyexchange.org/ojs/index.php/JERI/article/view/13037
Maiteny, P. T., & Ison, R. L. (2000). Appreciating systems: Critical reflections on the changing nature of
systems as a discipline in a systems-learning society. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 13(4),
559-586. doi:10.1023/A:1009549632626
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Naidoo, D. (2015). Understanding non-traditional PhD students habitus–implications for PhD programmes.
Teaching in Higher Education, 20(3), 340-351. doi:10.1080/13562517.2015.1017457
Nasir, U. M. (2010). Impact of knowledge management and inter-organizational system on supply chain
performance : The case of Australian agri-food industry. (Doctoral dissertation, Curtin University.)
Retrieved from http://espace.library.curtin.edu.au:80/R?func=dbin-jump-full&local_base=gen01-
era02&object_id=191821
Nunamaker Jr, J. F., Chen, M., & Purdin, T. D. (1990). Systems development in information systems
research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 7(3), 89-106.
doi:10.1080/07421222.1990.11517898
Owler, K. (2010). A ‘problem’to be managed? Completing a PhD in the arts and humanities. Arts and
Humanities in Higher Education, 9(3), 289-304. doi:10.1177/1474022209356330
Pearson, M., Cumming, J., Evans, T., Macauley, P., & Ryland, K. (2011). How shall we know them?
Capturing the diversity of difference in Australian doctoral candidates and their experiences. Studies in
Higher Education, 36(5), 527-542. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.594591
Perrot, C. (2012). Context-aware model driven software agents in healthcare information systems.
(Doctoral dissertation, Bond University.) Retrieved from
http://epublications.bond.edu.au.ezproxy.utas.edu.au/theses/100/
Pilbeam, C., & Denyer, D. (2009). Lone scholar or community member? The role of student networks in
doctoral education in a UK management school. Studies in Higher Education, 34(3), 301-318.
doi:10.1080/03075070802597077
Piriyasilpa, Y. (2009). Genre and discourse in online discussions: A study of online discussion postings in a
Thai EFL writing course. (Doctoral dissertation, Macquarie University.) Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/1959.14/88910
Platow, M. J. (2012). PhD experience and subsequent outcomes: A look at self-perceptions of acquired
graduate attributes and supervisor support. Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 103-118.
doi:10.1080/03075079.2010.501104
Preradovic, S. (2010). Chipless RFID system for barcode replacement. (Doctoral dissertation, Monash
University.) Retrieved from http://arrow.monash.edu.au/hdl/1959.1/289692
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
262
Pupunwiwat, P. (2012). Tag anti-collision resolution for improved quality of RFID data streams. (Doctoral
dissertation, Griffith University.) Retrieved from
https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/items/15f370a9-edf8-56cd-7445-085ce2bffc31/1/
Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 63(04),
655-660. doi:10.1079/pns2004399
Rice, P. L., & Ezzy, D. (1999). Qualitative research methods: A health focus. Melbourne, Australia:
Oxford University Press.
Ruth, A. (2004). Learning at the Screenface: A pentadic analysis of email discussion lists. (Doctoral
dissertation, Griffith University.) Retrieved from
https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/items/ce9fca97-e7b4-9d50-6519-f90f8608845b/1/
Seagram, B. C., Gould, J., & Pyke, S. W. (1998). An investigation of gender and other variables on time to
completion of doctoral degrees. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 319-335.
doi:10.1023/A:1018781118312
Sharip, S. B. M., & Ibrahim, S. S. B. (2014). Challenges in pursuing PhD: A survey on the experience of
Malaysian PhD candidates. Proceedings of the International Congress on Interdisciplinary Behaviour
and Social Sciences 2013, 107-111. Retrieved from
http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/abs/10.1201/b16658-20
Simeon, L. J. (2005). Developing a model of peer collaborating in e-learning that can be applied to the
PNG context. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wollongong.) Retrieved from
http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/329
Skotvoll, A. (2014). A study of the adjustment process of international PhD candidates. (Masters
dissertation, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology). Retrieved from http://www.diva-
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:742738/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Son, J.-B., & Park, S.-S. (2014). Academic experiences of international PhD students in Australian higher
education: From an EAP program to a PhD program. International Journal of Pedagogies and
Learning, 9(1), 26-37. doi:10.1080/18334105.2014.11082017
Stehlik, P. (2014). A needs-based approach to patient-relevant information delivery. (Doctoral dissertation,
Monash University.) Retrieved from http://arrow.monash.edu.au/hdl/1959.1/1133700
Sulaiman, R. (2010). MAgSeM: A multi-agent based security model for secure cyber services. (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Canberra.) Retrieved from
http://www.canberra.edu.au/researchrepository/items/31f0367a-d52d-a60e-6b66-0229e0f12b78/1/
Tress, B., Tress, G., & Fry, G. (2009). Integrative research on environmental and landscape change: PhD
students’ motivations and challenges. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(9), 2921-2929.
doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.03.015
Warburton, J., & Macauley, P. (2014). Wrangling the literature: Quietly contributing to HDR completions.
Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 45(3), 159-175. doi:10.1080/00048623.2014.928992
Watters, R. (2011). Exploring the impacts of organisational change: A structured prediction approach.
(Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University.) Retrieved from http://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/eprint/18967
Williams, C., & Lee, A. (1999). Forged in fire: Narratives of trauma in PhD supervison pedagogy. Southern
Review: Communication, Politics & Culture, 32(1), 6. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=200004415;res=IELAPA
Wong, M. C. (2011). An exploration of shift-to-shift clinical handover and clinical handover improvement
using a user-centred approach at the Royal Hobart Hospital, Tasmania, Australia. (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Tasmania.) Retrieved from http://ecite.utas.edu.au/75262
Wright, T., & Cochrane, R. (2000). Factors influencing successful submission of PhD theses. Studies in
Higher Education, 25(2), 181-195. doi:10.1080/713696139
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
263
Appendix
The results of the theses review
Research
Area
Thesis
Method
Limitations of Method
Limitations of Research
eHealth
(Jones,
2011)
A single-case qualita-
tive longitudinal
process study
1) Data vary in their temporal
embeddedness 2) Process data
tend to be eclectic.
1) Limited access to sensitive
data 2) Resource limitations 3)
Meeting – reporting cycle were
absent.
(Perrot,
2012)
Nunamaker et al.’s
(1990) systems de-
velopment research
methodology
1) Framework does not provide
an alternative for the entire MDA
stack 2) Framework does provide
a workflow and activity diagram
replacement 3) The gathering of
contextual information is not part
of the thesis.
1) This work assumes that all
defined context information is
available at the depth required 2)
A quantitative method has lim-
ited explanatory power 3) There
is little information about how
students learned and how in-
struction worked.
(Ahmad,
2013)
A positivism research
utilizing different
data mining process-
es
1) Equally important issues like
privacy and security are not in-
cluded 2) Working with large
number of features and attributes
in the dataset, led to limited accu-
racy, precision and specificity 3)
Ethical, legal, and social limita-
tions on data collection and dis-
tribution limit researchers and
industries when utilizing human
data.
As per methodological limita-
tions.
(Chen,
2014)
The research model
and methodology
based on a compre-
hensive software
engineering approach
1) Supporting the operations on
resource-limited devices 2) Time
for processing each state is lim-
ited.
As per methodological limita-
tions
(Wong,
2011)
A qualitative case
study
1) Research was based on one
department in one hospital 2)
Participants were only inter-
viewed once 3) The focus was
medical practitioners within the
Department of General Internal
Medicine 4) Ethical constraints,
only allowed the researcher to
observe the clinical handover
sessions, conducted away from
the clinical practice area 5) Lack
of generalizability is one major
limitation associated with case
study research 6) The nature of
qualitative research is such that
both the researcher and the partic-
ipants can introduce research bias.
1) Participants had a maximum
of one hour available to attend
the focus groups 2) Researcher
had to limit the number of ques-
tions for discussion 3) A limited
budget was available for the
design and development of the
electronic tool 4) No standards
available to guide practice for
clinical handover.
(Sulaiman,
2010)
The system develop-
ment research meth-
od
Method and methodology diffi-
cult to define
Used only plain text for the in-
vestigation
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
264
Research
Area
Thesis
Method
Limitations of Method
Limitations of Research
ePeer
Learning
(Endicott,
2011)
Qualitative method:
semi-structured in-
terview (individual
teachers); focus
groups (whole net-
work groups); docu-
mentary evidence
(artifacts of network-
based professional
learning); and re-
search diary (field
notes from partici-
pant observation)
Restricted cohort of specialist
language teachers.
The authenticity of the case nar-
ratives was perhaps affected by
the changes of people, places or
events that would identify the
participants, either directly or
indirectly.
(Ruth,
2004)
Mixed methods: Case
study with content
analysis (of online
conversation) & sur-
vey. These were
drawn from four
email discussion lists.
Survey had a limited data collec-
tion period and a restricted group
of participants. Also, data collec-
tion occurred during only one
year – time constraints.
Unspecified
(Simeon,
2005)
Qualitative method:
semi-structured in-
terview, participant
observation, artifacts
(initial planning flow
charts, course out-
lines), and research-
ers’ journal
Limited to two case studies that
each case consisted of an Instruc-
tional designer (ID) working with
one or more lecturers.
Limited ICT skills of participat-
ing lecturers.
(Dawson,
2007)
Mixed methods:
quantitative method –
online survey, stu-
dent online commu-
nication interactions
and social network
analyses; and qualita-
tive method – content
analyses of the dis-
cussion forum tran-
scripts and student
interviews.
The limitations were associated
with the population size investi-
gated and the lack of scalability
of the adopted methods.
Unspecified
(Gerbic,
2006)
Qualitative method:
interview, online
discussions, and pa-
per-based course
documents and in-
formation from
online site.
1) The difficulty in identifying
reliable and valid units of text
during content analysis 2) Lack of
suitable recording tool; thus lead-
ing to poor quality of interview 3)
Unresponsiveness of some stu-
dents during interviews.
The structure of the investigated
courses limited the boundaries of
the research.
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
265
Research
Area
Thesis
Method
Limitations of Method
Limitations of Research
(Calway,
2005)
Mixed methods:
Qualitative method -
Folio methodology
(unobtrusive re-
search). Also, reflec-
tive interviews with
staff. Quantitative -
web-site page
(webCT) of a com-
pleted learning skills
questionnaire.
A limitation of the data analysis
was the difficulty in verifying the
questionnaire responses with the
students who completed the learn-
ing skills inventory.
Unspecified
(Huang,
2013)
Mixed methods (with
an embedded case
study): qualitative
(observations and
focus groups) and
quantitative (ques-
tionnaire).
Limited number of participants
Only the students’ perceptions
were investigated.
(Dawson,
2010)
Qualitative method
with multiple-case
study methodology
(semi-structured
interviews).
The model’s initial selection cri-
teria were limited to participants
being current supervisors or Sup-
plemental Instruction Leaders
(SILs) with mentors.
Unspecified
(Lander,
2013)
Mixed methods: dis-
course analysis on
qualitative data was
supplemented by
quantitative data
concerning interac-
tion patterns.
Unspecified
Unspecified
(Piriyasilpa,
2009)
Qualitative method:
online discussion
postings
Unspecified
The study was limited in terms
of having small groups of partic-
ipants, not investigating areas in
Systemic Functional Linguistics
(SFL), and teacher interaction
had not been investigated
(Khoo,
2012)
Mixed methods:
quantitative (ques-
tionnaires) and quali-
tative (focus groups,
interviews, observa-
tion and document
analysis).
Unspecified
The number of participants in
the research study was relatively
small.
(Stehlik,
2014)
Mixed methods:
Questionnaire, Ob-
servational tech-
niques, personal in-
terviews, and focus
groups. Moreover,
System development
and usability evalua-
tion were included.
Unspecified
1) Only one General Practitioner
(GP) was recruited in initial
interviews, therefore the data
collected was limited 2) Feed-
back from practices indicated
that lack of remuneration for
their time (GP) was the primary
reason for lack of participation.
Therefore, limited resources
influenced research participa-
tion.
Doctoral Students: Investigating Challenges in Theory and Practice
266
Research
Area
Thesis
Method
Limitations of Method
Limitations of Research
eSupply
Chain
Manage-
ment
(Nasir,
2010)
Mixed method re-
search methodology
(Interviews & Sur-
vey)
Compromise due to requirements
of the structural equation model
and the length of questionnaire.
Small geographic coverage due
to limited fund.
(Bidar,
2011)
A quantitative ap-
proach (survey)
Survey length constraints limits
sampled items
Responses from single respond-
ents leading to possible response
bias or social desirability bias.
(Coelho,
2006)
Survey based on
interviews and direct
observation
1) Bias by the observer 2) Selec-
tion of important facts decided by
the observer
Unspecified
(Huang,
2010)
Mixed methods. Sur-
veys, interviews.
1) Measurement items’ ambiguity
2) Bias in the questionnaire 3)
Limitations of self-reported
measures.
1) Limited sampling due to lack
of resources 2) Economic down-
turn during cross-sectional data
collection.
(Huq, 2007)
An exploratory case
study framework,
with methods from
decision theory,
game theory, fuzzy
logic and simulation
for analysis
The use of a single case study
1) Limited timeframe impacted
the collected data 2) Scenario
utilized does not represent busi-
ness reality in the real world.
(Watters,
2011)
Interviews, document
reviews, system
analysis and design
The use of a single case study
The absence of any statistical
conclusions since the study only
conducted a single case study
(Pupunwiw
at, 2012)
Design and develop-
ment
Unspecified
Unspecified
(Arunthari,
2005)
Postal Survey, Inter-
views, observations.
1) Low response rate in postal
survey 2) Findings of the qualita-
tive study is not generalizable, as
study is limited to certain location
and context.
Unspecified
(Preradovic,
2010)
Design and develop-
ment
Unspecified
Unspecified
Bamgboje-Ayodele, Ye, Almond, & Sakulwichitsintu
267
Biographies
Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele is a PhD candidate in Information Systems
in the School of Engineering and ICT, at the University of Tasmania,
Australia. Her work focuses on knowledge retention in relation to con-
sumer safe food management behaviour. Her research interests align
with information systems, usability studies, consumer behaviour,
knowledge management and electronic supply chain management.
Michelle Ye is a recent PhD graduate from the School of Engineering
and ICT, University of Tasmania in Australia. Her research interests
include power and political behaviour in information system imple-
mentations, social influence, resistance to change, group behaviours,
business process management, and organisational decision making &
problem solving.
Helen Almond is a PhD candidate in the eHealth Services Research
Group (eHSRG), School of Engineering & ICT, University of Tasma-
nia, Australia. She has more than 35 years of diverse international
nursing experiences. Her research focuses on community based partic-
ipatory research methodology to examine the impact of eHealth on the
delivery of holistic person centred care for people with complex chron-
ic conditions in rural communities.
Songlak Sakulwichitsintu is a PhD candidate in Information Systems
at the University of Tasmania. Her work focuses on improving stu-
dents’ learning experience in relation to peer learning in online envi-
ronment. Her research interests align with technology-supported peer
learning, educational technology, and electronic learning management.
